Who’s Adjusting the Climate in Tucumcari: Cows, Canals, or Hansen?

30 06 2008

On Sunday I posted about the USHCN climate station of record in Tucumcari, NM highlighting its positive points since it has all the hallmarks of a well sited station with a long and uninterrupted record. But something was odd with the temperature record that didn’t quite make sense at first glance.

I also cross posted my report on Climate Audit since I always value additional input from the community there.

I noted that while this station is in fact well sited, and rates a CRN2, it has some oddities with it’s temperature record around the year 2000, something that looked like a step function to me.


Click for larger graph from NASA GISTEMP

Of course, even though this a truly rural station, 3 miles from the outskirts of town, Hansen and GISS apply adjustments to it anyway, which is part of the flawed “nightlights” algorithm incorrectly flagging this station for adjustment. Even though the adjustment makes the present cooler, it still seems misplaced given the station quality and history. Steve McIntyre said it best:

Here we have a rural station where there doesn’t seem to be any reason to adjust the temperature for population growth/UHI. But in this case, Hansen adjusts Tucumcari as though it were a city. Why is he even adjusting Tucumcari at all? (The “reason” is that its lights value removes it from the rural classification and it goes into the adjustment pool.) While Hansen sometimes seemingly cools rural stations in the past, for the GISS dset2 version here, he warms the past of the station (cools the present).

It’s more that this is a case of another unjustified adjustment by the “adjuster in chief” showing once again that the Hansen adjustments do not do what they are supposed to do – and the best that can be hoped from the Hansen adjustment program by users of this dataset is that the adjustments overall end up being pointless and random, rather than pointless and biased.

The adjustment by GISS looks like this:

Ok adjustments aside, the fact that there is a step at 2000 that remained unexplained until commenters on CA started looking at the data themselves. DaleC provided this graph: Read the rest of this entry »





Reader Poll: James Hansen calls for trials of energy executives, what next?

30 06 2008

BUMPED for visibility. Originally published on 6/24. Bumped on 6/28 and again on 6/30

This poll will gauge reader perception to the issue that Dr. Hansen of NASA has recently raised that I cover in my post here. One vote per computer, and please spread this permalink to the poll far and wide to get a good mix of input across the blogosphere.

Click on a dot, then click the little yellow vote icon. Poll closed.

I will run this poll 1 week until next Wednesday at 9AM PST, at which time it will close. The results will be submitted to a member of the U.S. Senate for distribution, NASA’s director, and will also be mailed to Dr. Hansen at NASA GISS.

You can subscribe to the results of this poll by RSS. Simply copy the link below into your RSS reader.

http://polldaddy.com/pollRSS.aspx?id=49940E93EC30ACAF

NOTE: A couple of Pro-Hansen sites have staged a “crash party” for this poll. This has accounted for a huge increase in the votes for the first question overnight. This sometimes happens with online polls when agenda driven activists decide to skew it, which is the biggest weakness of online polls.

Addendum: Some other sites that are not Pro Hansen have also now linked to this poll, so I suppose it is becoming a battle between opposing views now. Agenda driven activists on both sides are at work now. 

Update 7/1 It appears that about 8000 votes were added for question 1 overnight. -Anthony

Update 7/2 9 AM PST Poll is closed, more here





What a great USHCN station looks like: Tucumcari

29 06 2008

I’ve spent a lot of time on this blog showing how badly maintained and situated the stations in the USHCN network are. And rightly so, the majority of them have issues. But, finding the good ones is actually more important, because they are the ones that hold the true unpolluted temperature signal. Unfortunately, the “good ones” are few and far between.

But when one comes along that is a real gem, it deserves to be highlighted. I present the USHCN climate station of record for Tucumcari New Mexico, COOP ID # 299156, located at the Agricultural Experiment station about 3 miles outside of the edge of town.

I “had” (he just moved to St. Louis) a nephew who lived in Tucumcari, and he just happened to be friends with the director of the experiment farm. Before my nephew left they both helped me get this survey done.


Click picture for additional images

Surfacestations.org image gallery link

This station has several advantages:

  • Length of continuous record – going back to at least 1946 at this location, possibly to 1905 but NCDC MMS metadata stops at 1946.
  • Length of continuous instrumentation – using mercury max/min thermometers
  • Length of continuous data record – there doesn’t appear to be any missing years
  • Lack of encroachment – 3 miles from the northeast edge of town, little development, little UHI. Tucumcari is well off the beaten path of development. Population actually declined 12% in recent years.
  • Good siting – the station rates a CRN2 due to distant trees and sun angle, and one small asphalt road 70 meters away.

See the station survey report here (PDF) You can also make out the station on Google Earth using this link. After opening Google Earth, zoom in and the fenced outline and screen will be visible.

Eyeballing, you can see that the temperature data trend for Tucumcari is slightly positive over the last century, about 0.5°C, but there is a “bump” in 2000, which brings it to about 0.9°C. This same bump appears in neighboring stations such as in San Jon (33km away) and in Boys Ranch (135km away). There is nothing in the metadata location or equipment record to suggest a reason for the bump. So, either the bump is naturally occurring, or there is something we don’t know about that changed in the local environment, or we have another data set splicing error like the GISS Y2K debacle from last year.


Click for larger graph from NASA GISTEMP

I plotted the data provided by GISS (which you can find here) to show the effect of the “bump” at year 2000 on the overall trend: Read the rest of this entry »





Astronomical Society of Australia publishes new paper warning of solar quieting and global cooling

28 06 2008

http://www.astronomy.org.au/ngn/media/client/asa-large.gif A new paper published by the Astronomical Society of Australia titled:

Does a Spin–Orbit Coupling Between the Sun and the Jovian Planets Govern the Solar Cycle?

contains a warning about earthly climate change not immediately obvious from the abstract:

Based on our claim that changes in the Sun’s equatorial rotation rate are synchronized with changes in the Sun’s orbital motion about the barycentre, we propose that the mean period for the Sun’s meridional flow is set by a Synodic resonance between the flow period (~22.3 yr), the overall 178.7-yr repetition period for the solar orbital motion, and the 19.86-yr synodic period of Jupiter and Saturn.

According to an interview with Andrew Bolt, of the Australian Newspaper, Herald Sun, Ian Wilson, one of the authors explained:

It supports the contention that the level of activity on the Sun will significantly diminish sometime in the next decade and remain low for about 20 – 30 years. On each occasion that the Sun has done this in the past the World’s mean temperature has dropped by ~ 1 – 2 C.

###

Hmmm, I’m not sold on this idea. This is a lot like what Dr. Theodor Landscheidt proposes. I have a little bit of trouble understanding how the “mass at a distance” gravitational effects of Jupiter and Saturn could have much effect on the solar dynamo.

I’m sure both my readers, and Dr. Leif Svalgaard, who regularly monitors this blog, will have something to add to provide additional insight. – Anthony





Sun: Still quiet, over two months since a cycle 24 spot seen

28 06 2008

Its all quiet on the solar front. Too quiet. It has now been almost 2 and a half months since the last counted cycle 24 sunspot has been seen on April 13th, 2008. There was a tiny cycle 24 ”sunspeck” that appeared briefly on May 13th, but according to solar physicist Leif Svalgaard, that one never was assigned a number and did not “count”. It is just barely discernable on this large image from that day.


The sun today: spotless

NASA’s David Hathaway updated his solar cycle prediction page on June 4th. The start of cycle 24 keeps getting pushed forward while the ramp up line starts to look steeper into 2009.


Click for full sized image

The most recent forecast ( June 27th, 2008 ) from the Space Weather Prediction Center says little that would suggest our spotless streak would end any time soon:

Solar Activity Forecast: Solar activity is expected to be very
low.

Analysis of Solar Active Regions and Activity from 26/2100Z
to 27/2100Z: Solar activity was very low. No flares occurred during
the past 24 hours and the solar disk remains spotless.

 So when will solar cycle 24 really get going? It seems even the best minds of science don’t know for certain. A NOAA press release issued last year in April 2007 calls for Cycle 24 to be up to a year late, but they can’t decide on the intensity of SC24. That argument is ongoing.

Meanwhile the NOAA SEC Solar Cycle Progression Page looks pretty flat in all metrics charted.

 





Coloring the Models: Climate Change through Color Change

28 06 2008

NOTE: Mike alerted me in comments about this article he wrote along the lines of my story on Color and Temperature: Perception is everything. I thought this would be good to examine again.  This article below is re-posted from John Daly’s website, and was originally published July 7th, 2002. – Anthony


By: Michael Ronayne

In a story titled “Coloring Climate Change” by Nick Schulz, Tech Central Station reported that key documents, in a US government report titled “The National Assessment of the Potential Consequences of Climate Variability and Change“, were “doctored” to distort public perceptions of climate change. The report was published by the United States Global Change Research Program. According to their own web page, the USGCRP coordinates the research of ten Federal departments and agencies with active global change programs and provides liaison with the Executive Office of the President. The budget of the USGCRP in fiscal year 2002 was approximately $1.7 billion US dollars.

The National Assessment report has served as the basis for parts of the 2001 National Academy of Sciences’ report “Climate Change Science: An Analysis of Some Key Questions” prepared for President Bush on the state of climate science and, most recently, for the highly controversial “U.S. Climate Action Report – 2002“, covertly issued by climate alarmists within the Environmental Protection Agency, with the objective of embarrassing the Bush Presidency.

The TCS story displays two graphics, shown below. The graph on the left is the one which was circulated during the public comment period after the original draft was developed. It compares the Canadian Model with the Hadley Model for the lower 48 States for the summer months of June through August, over the next 100 years. The TCS story provides additional background on the two graphs and is highly commended to your attention. Then the disparity between the two models’ future forecasts, cast doubt on the predictive capacity of the Canadian and Hadley models, the USGCRP issued the final report on the right, with the color scale altered to obscure the differences between the two models.

Unfortunately for the USGCRP, the two models show the areas of warming and cooling to be occurring in widely different sections of the United States. The USGCRP’s solution to this conundrum was to alter the temperature color scale by eliminating yellow and green, and extending the color orange into negative temperature ranges as low as -1.0°F, thereby implying warming,  when in fact the models were showing no temperature change or cooling for some localities.

Above: When the “Draft” and “Final” copies of the USGCRP graphs are animated, employing a technique used elsewhere on this web site, the amateurish nature of the deception becomes painfully obvious. Read the rest of this entry »





Algal Fuels and Massive Scales

27 06 2008

Guest post by John Goetz

I keep an active watch of the news for progress being made in the areas of renewable and alternative energy sources. One area that has caught my eye is algal fuel (biofuel produced by algae). One company that has been in the news lately is Sapphire Energy, which claims to be able to produce ASTM compliant 91-octane biogasoline. Sapphire Energy says their technology “requires only sunlight, CO2 and non-potable water – and can be produced at massive scale on non-arable land”.

I am not trying to pick on any one solution or Sapphire Energy in particular. I simply wondered how massive a scale of CO2 and non-arable land is needed to make a noticeable dent in our gasoline demand.

First, how much CO2 do we need? The IPCC guidelines for calculating emissions require that an oxidation factor of 0.99 be applied to gasoline’s carbon content to account for a small portion of the fuel that is not oxidized into CO2. To calculate the CO2 emissions from a gallon of fuel, the carbon emissions are multiplied by the ratio of the molecular weight of CO2 to the molecular weight of carbon, or 44/12. Thus, the IPCC says the CO2 emissions from a gallon of gasoline = 2,421 grams x 0.99 x (44/12) = 8,788 grams = 8.8 kg/gallon = 19.4 pounds/gallon.

Now let’s assume Sapphire Energy simply reverses the process and consumes the CO2 to produce gasoline. In other words, we take 19.4 pounds of CO2 out of the atmosphere for every gallon of gasoline we produce. This seems like is a nice “carbon neutral” process.

Read the rest of this entry »





Color and Temperature: Perception is everything

26 06 2008

Recently I had some of my readers comment that they thought that The Weather Channel and USA Today (which uses TWC graphics) temperature maps seemed to look “hotter”. They suspected that the colors had changed. I tend to watch such things since my own company (IntelliWeather) produces similar maps.

I searched Google images for some saved older TWC maps, but found none. So I can’t be absolutely sure they have or have not changed.  But looking at the color scheme, nothing sticks out in my recollection of the temperature map colors.

But I decided that it would be an interesting exercise to compare USA national temperature maps from the commonly used services today. I saved national CURRENT temperature isotherms/gradient maps from around 03Z (11PM Eastern Time) tonight. All were generated within about an hour of each other.

What I found was surprising. Here they are in alphabetical order:

Intellicast: (probably the ugliest national temp map I’ve ever seen)


IntelliWeather:

Read the rest of this entry »





Kroger nixes global warming “policy”

26 06 2008

Question: Why does a major grocery store chain need a “comprehensive policy addressing climate change”?

Answer: They don’t.

http://compulsivec.files.wordpress.com/2007/03/kroger1.gif

The Atlanta Business Chronicle reports that one of the nations oldest and largest grocery firms, Kroger Inc., based in Cincinnati, OH rejected a shareholder proposal which called for the company to develop a comprehensive policy addressing climate change.

Having shopped at many a Kroger store myself, I’m glad I won’t be bombared with climate change messages while I shop. I really don’t need to know what the carbon footprint is on a can of soup or a head of lettuce.

Cincinnati-based Kroger (NYSE: KR) operates more than 2,400 supermarkets and multidepartment stores in 31 states.





Debate Thread: Miskolczi semi-transparent atmosphere model

26 06 2008

This thread debates the Miskolczi semi-transparent atmosphere model. 

The link with the easiest introduction to the subject is http://hps.elte.hu/zagoni/Proofs_of_the_Miskolczi_theory.htm





Surprise: Explosive volcanic eruption under the Arctic ice found

25 06 2008

I posted on a similar story about volcanic eruptions under Antarctic ice earlier this year. What is unique about this situation is that it was a large eruption that went completely undetected, and under pressures that they thought not possible. The big question is then; where did the heat from the volcano go, and what effect did it have on the sea ice environment? Another question is how much CO2 would such an eruption emit, and how long would it take to outgas? Research has been going on looking at volcanism in the ridge but this discovery of a significant eruption in 1999 is new and unexpected.

From Science and The Sea: “In the last few years, for example, scientists have found that a long ridge beneath the north polar ice cap is dotted with volcanoes, and with vents of superheated water that could be home to many new species.”

More info on the Gakkel Ridge here

Today’s Press release from EurekAlert:

International expedition discovers gigantic volcanic eruption in the Arctic Ocean




A “lonely ” seismometer drifts with the sea ice.
Click here for more information.

An international team of researchers was able to provide evidence of explosive volcanism in the deeps of the ice-covered Arctic Ocean for the first time. Researchers from an expedition to the Gakkel Ridge, led by the American Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution (WHOI), report in the current issue of the journal Nature that they discovered, with a specially developed camera, extensive layers of volcanic ash on the seafloor, which indicates a gigantic volcanic eruption.

“Explosive volcanic eruptions on land are nothing unusual and pose a great threat for whole areas,” explains Dr Vera Schlindwein of the Alfred Wegener Institute for Polar and Marine Research in the Helmholtz Association. She participated in the expedition as a geophysicist and has been, together with her team, examining the earthquake activity of the Arctic Ocean for many years. “The Vesuvius erupted in 79 AD and buried thriving Pompeii under a layer of ash and pumice. Far away in the Arctic Ocean, at 85° N 85° E, a similarly violent volcanic eruption happened almost undetected in 1999 – in this case, however, under a water layer of 4,000 m thickness.” So far, researchers have assumed that explosive volcanism cannot happen in water depths exceeding 3 kilometres because of high ambient pressure. “These are the first pyroclastic deposits we’ve ever found in such deep water, at oppressive pressures that inhibit the formation of steam, and many people thought this was not possible,” says Robert Reves-Sohn, staff member of the WHOI and lead scientist of the expedition carried out on the Swedish icebreaker Oden in 2007.

A major part of Earth’s volcanism happens at the so-called mid-ocean ridges and, therefore, completely undetected on the seafloor. There, the continental plates drift apart; liquid magma intrudes into the gap and constantly forms new seafloor through countless volcanic eruptions. Accompanied by smaller earthquakes, which go unregistered on land, lava flows onto the seafloor. These unspectacular eruptions usually last for only a few days or weeks.


The installation of a seismometer on an ice floe.
Click here for more information.

Volcanic ashes on the sea bed of Gakkel Ridge (Photo: WHOI)

Bathymetric chart of the Gakkel Ridge at 85°E. Photographic bottom surveys were conducted along profiles shown as thin, black lines. The photo showing volcanic ashes on the sea bed were taken at the site, which is marked with a red star and the letter a.




RIP George Carlin – whoosh!

24 06 2008

Since George has been “acted upon by nature”,and we’ll miss him, I thought this video of his “saving the planet” sketch might be a fitting epitaph. My favorite line of his, from the “hippy dippy weatherman” act was: “Why on TV do they always give the temperature at the airport? Nobody LIVES there!” (Warning: some adult language)





A new view on GISS data, per Lucia

24 06 2008

For some time I’ve been critical (and will likely remain so) of the data preparation techniques associated with NASA GISS global temperature data set. The adjustments, the errors, the train wreck FORTRAN code used to collate it, and the interpolation of data in the polar regions where no weather stations exists, have given me such lack of confidence in the data, that I’ve begun to treat it as an outlier. 

Lucia however makes a compelling argument for not discarding it as such, but to treat it as part of a group data set. She also makes some compelling logical tests that give an insight into the entire collection of datasets. As a result, I’m going to temper my view of the GISS data a bit and look at how it may be useful in the comparisons she makes.

Here is her analysis:


 Surface Temperatures Trends Through May: Month 89 and counting!

a guest post by Lucia Liljegren

Trends for the Global Means Surface temperature for five groups (GISS, HadCrut, NOAA/NCDC, UAH/MSU and RSS.) were calculated from Jan 2001-May 2008 using Ordinary Least Squares (OLS) using the method in Lee & Lund. to compute error bars, and Cochrane-Orcutt and compared to the IPCC AR4’s projected central tendency of 2C/century for the trend during the first few decades of this century.

The following results for mean trends and 95% confidence intervals were obtained:

  1. Ordinary Least Squares average of data sets: The temperature trend is -0.7 C/century ± 2.3C/century. This is inconsistent IPCC AR4 projection of 2C/century to a confidence of 95% and is considered falsified based on this specific test.
  2. Cochrane Orcutt, average of data sets: The temperature trend is -1.4 C/century ± 2.0 C/century. This is inconsistent with the IPCC AR4 projection of 2 C/century to a confidence of 95% and is considered falsified based on this specific test for an AR(1) process.
  3. OLS, individual data sets: All except GISS Land/Ocean result in negative trends. The maximum and minimum trends reported were 0.007 C/century and -1.28 C/century for GISS Land/Ocean and UAH MSU respectively. Based on this test, The IPCC AR4 2C/century projection is rejected to a confidence of 95% when compared to HadCrut, NOAA and RSS MSU data. It is not rejected based on comparison to GISS and UAH MSU.
  4. Cochrane-Orcutt, individual data sets: All individual data sets result in negative trends. The IPCC AR4 2C/century is falsified by each set individually.
  5. The null hypothesis of 0C/century cannot yet be excluded based on data collected since 2001. This, does not mean warming has stopped. It only means that the uncertainty in the trend is too large to exclude 0C/century based on data since 2001. Bar and Whiskers charts showing the range of trend falling inside the ±95% uncertainty intervals using selected start dates are discussed in Trends in Global Mean Surface Temperature: Bars and Whiskers Through May.

The OLS trends for the mean, and C-O trends for individual groups are compared to data in the figure immediately below:


Click for larger.

Figure 1: The IPCC projected trend is illustrated in brown. The Cochrane – Orcutt trend for the average of all five data sets is illustrated in orange; ±95% confidence intervals illustrated in hazy orange. The OLS trend for the average of all five data sets is illustrated in lavender, with ±95% uncertainty bounds in hazy lavender. Individual data sets were fit using Cochrane-Orcutt, and shown.

Discussion of Figure 1 Read the rest of this entry »





The “Hippocratic Oath” for Scientists

24 06 2008

Here is an interesting note from grrlscientist at scienceblogs:

“In response to what appears to be a growing problem, a group of people at the Institute of Medical Science at University of Toronto in Canada wrote a scientist’s version of the Hippocratic oath. This oath (below) was recited by all graduate students in the biological sciences at the beginning of the 2007-2008 academic year. “

I promise never to allow financial gain, competitiveness or ambition cloud my judgment in the conduct of ethical research and scholarship. I will pursue knowledge and create knowledge for the greater good, but never to the detriment of colleagues, supervisors, research subjects or the international community of scholars of which I am now a member.

Given the politicization of science, such as we’ve witnessed recently from Jim Hansen’s conduct in calling for trials, perhaps making this a requirement for all graduating science majors, plus a requirement for membership to professional organizations such as AMS, AAAS, etc might be a good idea.





Warming on 11 year hiatus? How about cooling?

23 06 2008

A guest post by Basil Copeland

Lucia, at rankexploits.com, has been musing over Tilo Reber’s posting of a graph showing flat 11 year trends in the HadCRUT land-ocean global temperature anomaly and the two MSU satellite data sets, UAH and RSS.  In answer to the question whether global warming is on an 11 year hiatus, “not quite,” says Lucia.  She challenges Tilo’s omission of the GISS data set, because notwithstanding questions about the reliability of GISS, it still shows a positive trend over the 11 year period in question.  Unless all the measures show a flat trend, Lucia’s not ready to conclude that global warming has been on an 11 year hiatus.

I understand the desire to look at as many metrics as possible in trying to divine what is going on with globally averaged temperature.  I also understand the reasons for questioning the reliability of GISS.  What I don’t understand is why the only measure of trend that seems to count is a trend derived from linear regression.  William Briggs recently had an interesting post to his blog on the relationship between trends in CO2 and temperature in which he introduced the use of loess lines to track trends that are not represented well by linear regression.  Loess refers to a type of locally weighted regression that in effect fits a piecewise linear or quadratic trend through the data, showing how the trend is changing over time.  Especially in an environment where the charge of cherry-picking the data — choosing starting and ending points to produce a particular result – is routinely made, loess lines are a relatively robust alternative to simple trend lines from linear regression.

 
Click for a larger image

Figure 1 fits a loess line through the data for GISS using the same 11 year period used by Tilo Reber (except that I’ve normalized all anomalies in this discussion relative to their 11 year mean to facilitate comparison to a common baseline). The red line is the GISS anomaly for this period, about its mean, and the blue line is the loess line.  While it varies up and down over the period in question, I would argue that the overall trend is essentially flat, or even slightly negative: the value of line at the end of the period is slightly lower than at the beginning of the period.  What this loess line shows is that a linear regression trend is not a particularly good way to represent the actual trend in the data.  Without actually fitting a linear trend line, we can reasonably guess that it will trend upwards, because of the way the loess line is lower in the first half of the period in question, and higher in the second half.  Linear regression will fit a positive, but misleading, slope through the data, implying that at the end of the period the GISS is on an upward trend when in fact the trend peaked around 2006 and has since declined.


Click for a larger image

Figure 2 is rainbow of colors comparing all four of the metrics we tend to follow here on WUWT.  Not surprisingly, the loess lines of HadCRUT, UAH and RSS all track closely together, while GISS is the odd duck of the lot.  So what does this kaleidoscope of colors tell us about whether global warming is has gone on an 11 year hiatus?  I think it tells us rather more than even Tilo was claiming.  All of the loess lines show a net decline in the trend over the 11 year period in question. It is relatively minor in the case of GISS, but rather pronounced in the case of the other three.  Of the other three, the median anomaly at the beginning of the period, as represented by the loess lines, was 0.125; at the end of the period, the median anomaly had dropped to -0.071, for a total decline of 0.196, or almost 0.2C.

Global warming on hiatus?  It looks to me like more evidence of global cooling.  Will it continue?  Neither linear regression nor loess lines can answer that question.  But the loess lines certainly warn us to be cautious in naively extrapolating historical trends derived by simple linear regression. 

Not even GISS can support the conclusion from the last 11 years of data that global warming continues to march upward in unrelenting fashion. 





NASA’s Jim Hansen calls for energy company execs to be put on trial

22 06 2008

http://www.blog.thesietch.org/wp-content/uploads/2008/04/james_hansen.jpg
He’s got the whoooole woorld in his hands…

This troubling news from the Guardian, UK

“James Hansen, one of the world’s leading climate scientists, will today call for the chief executives of large fossil fuel companies to be put on trial for high crimes against humanity and nature, accusing them of actively spreading doubt about global warming in the same way that tobacco companies blurred the links between smoking and cancer.

Hansen will use the symbolically charged 20th anniversary of his groundbreaking speech to the US Congress – in which he was among the first to sound the alarm over the reality of global warming – to argue that radical steps need to be taken immediately if the “perfect storm” of irreversible climate change is not to become inevitable.

Speaking before Congress again, he will accuse the chief executive officers of companies such as ExxonMobil and Peabody Energy of being fully aware of the disinformation about climate change they are spreading.”

complete story

I suspect he’ll be calling for the jailing of bloggers like myself next. I think Mr. Hansen has lost all sense of reason, and his last shred of credibility.

UPDATE: Apparently Mr. Hansen has made the claims above on live radio on the Dian Rehm show this morning, audio files of the interview will be up shortly here:

http://wamu.org/programs/dr/08/06/23.php#20635

When the audio file is up, I’ll post a direct link.

AUDIO CLIPS NOW AVAILABLE:

Listen to this segment

Joe D’Aleo created this graph this morning:

http://icecap.us/images/uploads/HANSEN_AND_CONGRESS.jpg
click for a larger image.
Satellite measured global temperature trend from the University of Alabama, Huntsville show sthat it is cooler now than when he made his testimony in 1988.

UPDATE2: See the reader poll on this issue here





Midwest Floods and Unjustified Climate Change Fear Mongering

22 06 2008

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wires/20080619/midwest-floods-no-insurance/images/301d4fbb-d8e7-436c-a9fd-ecebe5fc9706.jpg

A guest post by Mike Smith, CCM and AMS Fellow.

The Midwest floods were rolling downstream last week, setting river stage records in Iowa, bursting levees on the Mississippi, and causing thousands to be displayed from their homes.  Billions have been lost in damaged and destroyed property and 24 lives lost.

In the midst of this tragedy, the National Climatic Data Center (NCDC) and the Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) tried to capitalize on heightened public interest with an attempt to gain headlines by tying these tragic events to “global warming.”

The EDF proclaimed:  Did Humans Cause the Midwest Flooding?  In the piece, EDF’s James Wang writes, “Another element [of the Midwest floods] may be global warming, which increases the probability of extreme weather events like torrential rain.”  NCDC, a part of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, headlined, Extreme Weather to Become More Common.  The respective headlines can be found at http://environmentaldefenseblogs.org/climate411/ and www.noaa.gov/ .

This is fear mongering, not the advancement of science.  And, it detracts from NOAA as a whole because its National Weather Service performed heroically – with its field staff working long hours coping with the floods and accompanying tornadoes and severe thunderstorms.

It is unseemly to work to score public relations points when people are losing their homes, their crops, and their lives.

And, it leaves us to ponder a key question:  Does the science justify tying the Midwest floods to Global Warming? My answer?  An emphatic “no.” Read the rest of this entry »





If Global Warming was a company decision, how would you vote?

22 06 2008

http://www.toastmasters.org/OtherImages/BoardofDirectors.aspx

Lucia at Rank Exploits poses this thought:

“I always think it’s best to ask yourself: Do I really think a particular method of looking at data is meaningful? Would I still believe this if the answers turned out “wrong” from my POV? Or, will I eventually find myself explaining my own method gives uncertainty bounds that are “too small”, when my method suddenly gives “wrong” (in my eyes) answers?

So, in this regard, I need to ask Tilo: Why throw out GISS Temp”?

Thanks, Lucia, for taking a different look at this. It is true that one can make arguments for and against GISTEMP as a valid/not valid data set.

My view is that this is a lot like voting for a company wide policy change on a company board of directors.

Let’s say this issue was on a company board of directors decision to choose to make changes to policy related to employee comfort. Some employees complain that the work environment is too hot and they have been suffering a long term effect. The board decides to hire four consultants with the mandate: “tell us if we should expend the money to replace all of our a/c units company wide in all of our world locations. The cost will be huge, so we need to know before we make a policy change to do this.”

One of the consultants to members of the board who strongly advocates the policy change also has been lobbying company staff worldwide and other board members with the data he has collected and collated that shows that the trend is shifting in the direction that he advocates. As consultant, he is also the creator of one of the datasets used to evaluate the policy change. Read the rest of this entry »





A Window on Water Vapor and Planetary Temperature – Part 2

21 06 2008

A few days ago I posted a story highlighting the drop in water vapor in the atmosphere which initially looked like the entire atmosphere due to a labeling issue by ESRL, but turned out to be only at the 300 millibar height and not up to 300mb as the ESRL graph was labeled.

Even so, that brought a lot of people into looking at and analyzing the issue further. Barry Hearn of the website junkscience.com brought to my attention a review of the various atmospheric levels contained in the ERSL database. I had planned to do this myself, but I’ve been traveling this week and didn’t have as much time as I normally would, so  I’m pleased to present Barry’s writeup here for further consideration.

For some background into atmospheric absorption efficiency of common gases compared to the  electromagnetic spectrum, this graph is valuable:

Note the CO2 peak at 15 microns is the only significant one, as the 2.7 and 4.3 micron CO2 peaks have little energy to absorb in that portion of the spectrum.  But the H2O (water vapor) has many peaks from .8 to 8 microns, two that are fairly broad,  and H2O begins absorbing almost continuously from 10 microns on up, making it overwhelmingly the major “greenhouse gas”.


Click for a larger image


Is the atmosphere holding more water vapor?

JunkScience.com
June, 2008

As followers of the enhanced greenhouse controversy are no doubt aware carbon dioxide cannot, unaided, drive catastrophic global warming — it simply lacks the physical properties.

In order to generate interesting outcomes climate modelers include impressive positive feedback from increasing atmospheric water vapor (marvelous magical multipliers, as we call them). By trivial warming of the atmosphere increased CO is supposed to facilitate an increase in the atmosphere’s capacity for the one truly significant greenhouse gas, water vapor, which then further heats the atmosphere, facilitating more water vapor and so on.

So, the obvious question is, is the atmosphere getting “wetter” and, if so, where?

Fortunately ESRL provides time series for various layers of the atmosphere:

Note that all graphics are confusingly labeled “up to 300mb only” but this refers to their maximum availability and not the current representation. Water vapor is given as specific, not relative humidity (grams water per kilogram of air) and is thus temperature independent for our purposes.

Firstly, there has been a moistening trend in the 1000mb (up to about 500 feet) layer.

Click for a larger image

Read the rest of this entry »





Anchorage sets new record for latest high temp day – still waiting for 70

20 06 2008


From the Anchorage Daily News, a view into what the weather is like this spring at 61.22N -149.85W

Days turn the corner toward darkness

After solstice today, it’s all downhill to winter
By BETH BRAGG
bbragg@adn.com

(06/20/08 00:39:20)

At 3:59 this afternoon, the sun will reach its northernmost point above the celestial equator and we’ll mark the official summer solstice. Many calendars note the solstice by calling it the first day of summer, but Alaskans know better. Today at 3:59 p.m., Alaska will make a U-turn and head straight toward winter as days start getting shorter.

Which is a shame, seeing how summer so far has been MIA.

We are deep in June and, as of Thursday, the temperature has yet to hit 70 degrees at the National Weather Service’s observation point near the airport, where daily highs and lows are recorded.

It hit 67 on Tuesday near the airport, the highest official reading in Anchorage since the year began.

We haven’t had to wait this long for a 70-degree day since 1993, when the mercury hit the 70s for the first time on June 19th.

Welcome to a record-breaker. Rah.

Could be worse, of course. Could be snowing. That happened in 1998, when solstice revelers spending the night atop Flattop celebrated in a freak snowstorm at 3,500 feet.

Snow or no snow, summer has been slow to arrive in Anchorage.

Beth Schlabaugh, president of the Alaska Master Gardeners Association’s Anchorage chapter, said lots of green things are off kilter because of summer’s delay.

“Definitely we’re seeing a much later season this year,” she said. “Everyone has talked to me about things being two to three weeks behind schedule.”

Roses have been late to break dormancy, she said. Irises and lilacs are only now showing up, and not everywhere. Seeds are slow to germinate.

“Just in my garden, the hostas are slow to come out of the ground,” Schlabaugh said. “Things are really late.”

On the upside, early bloomers like tulips are lasting longer, she said. And if you haven’t limed or thatched your lawn yet, the cool weather means you can do it now even at this late date and still reap the benefits.

The cool weather will be a blessing to runners who will spend Saturday morning running 26.2 miles in the Mayor’s Midnight Sun Marathon.

“Probably the best weather is somewhere between 40 and 60 degrees,” said Will Kimball, a two-time winner of the marathon. “You want cool.”

Kimball is calling this “the summer of the cold breeze.”

“Often it looks pleasant,” he said, “but that breeze has got a cold nip to it.”

Some people think the cool is, well, cool.

“I love this weather,” said Sam Albanese, a forecaster with the National Weather Service in Anchorage. “I’ve been up here 22 years now and as far as I’m concerned, 65 and cloudy is ideal. Seventy degrees and sunshine, and I feel like I’m down in Georgia.”

Albanese offers no promises for those aching for hot, sunny weather. It seemed like summer Tuesday and Wednesday — days that brought sunshine and warmth — but today and tomorrow should be cooler and maybe a bit cloudy.

The forecast for the weekend says it might hit 70 on Sunday — two days after the solstice, and two days closer to winter.